Nature of Petitioner's Request: I am a married
43-year-old father of two. I live in central Virginia, which has a great
microbrew scene. A few months ago, I picked up an old fridge and converted it
to a kegerator so I could enjoy local brews on tap. But, I quickly realized,
because of the keg laws in Virginia, buying kegs is a pain. When I go into the
grocery store, I have to go to customer service, wait in line, fill out a tag,
pay a deposit, and have them bring up the keg and tag it. I live in
Charlottesville, a college town, and while I am waiting in line, I routinely
watch a couple of college students check out with double-digit numbers of
30-packs, with no more hassle than showing an ID. I guess I understand the
original idea around the keg tagging laws, but it seems to be more bureaucracy
and paperwork than actually accomplishing what it is supposed to. Can I simply
purchase a keg as I do cases or six-packs? I may be a voice of one, but I for
one would support repealing the keg laws, that is 3VAC5-70-180, Regulation of
the sale of alcoholic beverages in kegs and other containers; permit and
registration; other requirements. Here is a link to an article about Michigan
repealing its similar law: http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2017/11
/michigan_keg_tag_law_repealed.html.

Agency Decision: Request denied.

Statement of Reason for Decision: The Virginia Alcoholic
Beverage Control Authority held a public comment period concerning the petition
that requested an amendment or repeal of the existing regulation governing the
sale of alcoholic beverages in kegs and other containers, permit and
registration, and other requirements. The petitioner requested an amendment or
repeal of the regulation's requirements for completing the keg decleration and
receipt form prior to purchase. The board took public comment at the meeting.
The petitioner was not present. The board declined to take action in regards to
the petition, citing that the public safety concerns the regulation helps to
mitigate outweigh the inconveniences the petitioner cited in his request.

"I, Cynthia Ellen Hites, as a citizen of the Commonwealth
of Virginia, pursuant to Virginia Code § 2.2.-4007, do humbly submit this
petition for the following amendment to Virginia Administrative Code
24VAC35-60-70, to have the VASAP Breath Alcohol Ignition Interlock Device
(BAIID) required breath sample size reduced from 1.5 liters to 1.0 liter. Due
to generally smaller lung capacity compared to men, it has been shown women
have 16 times the failed breath sample attempts (aborts) when using the BAIID."(1)
Failed breath sample attempts can be caused by "not providing enough air
or providing too much air, humming at the incorrect tone or volume, breaks in
the hum, or too much humidity or saliva in the breath sample." This means
women have 16 times the interaction with the machine upon startup, and, during
rolling retests while on Virginia's roadways. I personally struggled mightily
with the basic functionality of the device and experienced hyperventilation on
numerous occasions due to sequential invalid samples during use of the ignition
interlock device. Incidentally, an overlooked cause of the exponentially higher
number of breath sample aborts for women, is simply tone of voice. The BAIID
anti-circumvention feature requires the driver provide sufficient reverberation
for the device's handset to detect human presence. Of course, women naturally
tend to have higher pitched voices that produce less reverb, and can, and do,
force a difficult and uncomfortable alteration in vocal method to achieve a
passing breath sample. Paramount in my opinion, however, is the fact the
maneuver required for the BAIID breath sample involves not tidal breath, but
execution of the vital capacity maneuver to obtain the breath sample. The vital
capacity maneuver obtains the greatest volume of air that can be expelled from
the lungs after taking the deepest possible breath. Even then, the subject is
required to actually force breath out of the lungs into the BAIID far beyond
what's natural, and in my case, experience disorientation via hypoxia and
actual physical lung pain frequently. "In order to fulfill the minimum 1.5
liter volume requirement...the sixty year old woman must exhale at least 60% of
her vital capacity. Whereas the twenty year old man would only have to exhale
about 25% of his vital capacity. At the same blood alcohol concentration (BAC),
the smaller lung volume would yield a greater breath alcohol reading."(2)
So, in addition to being 16 times more difficult for women to simply achieve to
a valid breath sample, the requirement alone can skew the test results to
reflect an erroneously high BAC. To mitigate these existing human factors that
inherently punish women, and others with similar known, or unknown conditions,
to a greater degree; and to initiate a decrease in the potential for vehicle
collision due to distracted driving, lowering the breath sample requirement to
1.0 liter will be a step closer to closing the disparity gap of punishment
between sexes, and detrimental judicial imbalance currently existing due simply
to physiological differences among offenders. States the statute 24VAC-35-60-70
F, 4: "The ignition interlock device shall indicate when a 1.5 L breath
sample has been collected and shall indicate this by audible or visual means.
The commission may authorize service providers to adjust the breath volume
requirement to as low as 1.0 L upon receipt of documentation from a licensed
physician verifying the existence of an applicable medical condition. The
physician's documentation shall be submitted in a format approved by the
commission." The one-liter volume breath sample requirement is legally
permissible, and I implore the commission to take under advisement this
petition to permanently lower the requirement, in order to strengthen the
integrity of the program, so as to not unwittingly punish women, and
incidentally; asthmatics, COPD sufferers, congestive heart failure survivors,
and undiagnosed pulmonary patients to a greater degree. Please, dear
Commissioners, weigh this petition and begin to create a more judiciously solid
system. Humbly Yours, Cynthia E. Hites"